positioning critical reflection within cooperative ... · data analysis of a qualitative case study...
TRANSCRIPT
Positioning critical reflection within cooperative
education: A transactional model
PATRICIA LUCAS1
Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
Proponents of cooperative and work-integrated education embed critical reflection in their programs to enhance the
likelihood of an experience resulting in meaningful learning for students. Theoretically framed guidelines in the literature
on how to determine and facilitate critical reflection in practice remains very limited, highlighting the importance of
developing ways of improving stakeholders understanding and practice of critical reflection within these complex
learning arrangements. Data analysis of a qualitative case study exploring critical reflection in a specific cooperative
education context enabled the development and design of a transactional model to illustrate the positioning and
functionality of critical reflection. The theoretical underpinnings for this model are derived from John Dewey’s
educational writings. To date no published diagrammatic representations have been found to assist with the
development and enhancement of our understanding of the complex dynamics and interplay of factors that influence and
contribute to the practice of critical reflection, and the consequences of these transactions. (Asia-Pacific Journal of
Cooperative Education, 2017(3), 257-268)
Keywords: Critical reflection, work-integrated learning, transaction, qualitative research, cooperative education,
transactional model
Critical reflection is strongly advocated as being an integral part of cooperative education, a
form of work-integrated learning (WIL). Indeed, critical reflection is embedded in a range of
higher education workplace based learning programs including clinically based education,
teaching practicums, business internships and agricultural fieldwork, to name but a few.
Seminal authors in the field of education, and their contemporaries, have highlighted the
qualities of critical reflection within their writing. The qualities of critical reflection are
presented and argued within the writings on experiential learning (Dewey, 1938; Kolb,
1984/2015), development of professionalism (Schön, 2009/1983), linking theory and practice
(Argyris & Schön, 1974; Billett, 2009; Billett & Choy, 2011; Dewey, 1938), development of
reflective thinking (Dewey, 1997/1910) and life long learning (Billett & Choy, 2011; Dewey,
1938). Critical reflection is believed to enhance the likelihood of experience leading to learning,
can assist with the creation of new knowledge, and potentially have an impact on future
behaviors and practices of individuals, and their communities.
Many authors concur that critical reflection is ordained to be a higher level of cognition
(Cowan, 2014; Harvey, Coulson, Mackaway, & Winchester-Seeto, 2010; Lucas & Fleming, 2012;
Smith, 2011). Accordingly, they contend that this form of reflection is complicated and quite
often challenging for the learner to practice, and the teacher to facilitate (Hatton & Smith, 1994;
Smith, 2011). In addition, within the context of cooperative and work-integrated education,
there is the role the work-place supervisor or mentor might play in facilitating critical
reflection. Although there are countless reflective strategies available (Fleming & Martin, 2007;
Harvey et al., 2010) theoretically framed guidelines in the literature on how to determine,
facilitate and assess critical reflection in practice remain very limited (Harvey, Coulson, &
McMaugh, 2016). This disparity, in particular the facilitation of critically reflective practices,
prompts the writing of this paper. The aim of this paper is to provide an insight into the
development of a theoretically based, functional model positioning critical reflection within a
cooperative education framework that also has relevance to other forms of WIL.
1 Corresponding author: Patricia Lucas, [email protected]
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 258
The transactional model of critical reflection presented in this paper is both dynamic and
progressive in its interpretation, and is pragmatically orientated to enhance understandings of
the critical reflection processes and practice for all three stakeholders (student, university,
workplace) within this specific learning context. A strength of the model lies in its theoretical
underpinnings that help overcome some of the limitations of critical reflection by enabling the
development of a broader and deeper understanding of how it can be utilized by all
stakeholders. Furthermore, this model actively responds to Harvey et al. (2010) and Harvey
et al.’s (2016) invitation to develop models, with sound theoretical foundations, for
encouraging improved understandings of the role reflection plays in cooperative and work-
integrated education curricula.
COOPERATIVE EDUCATION – A COMPLEX LEARNING ARRANGEMENT
Cooperative education programs are represented as complex learning arrangements reliant
upon the demonstration of collaboration and alignment between the student, workplace and
university (Fleming, 2015). Therefore, these programs are designed and implemented in such
a way that the students are proactively encouraged and managed to become advanced
independent learners within this particular learning arrangement (Cooper, Orrell, & Bowden,
2010). The curriculum, especially the nature of the “content” to be learnt through cooperative
education, is determined by the student, based upon the context of the specific workplace
environment, and their personal (usually career driven) and academic goals. Educational
literature presents three broad perspectives to understanding curriculum orientation that are
utilized by educational systems to support student learning. These three curriculum
orientations include transmission, transaction and transformation, with each taking into account
specific learning contexts and a range of educational practices (Miller & Seller, 1990; Van Gyn
& Grove-White, 2011) and expected learning outcomes (Harvey et al., 2010).
Cooperative education practices, specifically those imbued with experiential learning and
critical reflection concepts are situated within the transactional and transformative curriculum
orientations where the student is positioned as the driver of the learning within a partnership
or in alignment with educators located both within the university and industry (Van Gyn &
Grove-White, 2011). Transactional orientations are learning processes where the student is
actively engaged. This perspective aligns with an epistemology of constructivism; a view of
learning where the learner constructs new knowledge informed by earlier experiences (Dewey,
1938). Therefore, high value is placed on past and present experiences to support the
construction of new knowledge that is meaningful and personalized to the individual learner.
However, becoming more knowledgeable is only a part of the overall experience, as it also
includes emotions, aesthetics and ethics (Elkjaer, 2009). Transformative orientations, also
referred to as being emancipatory, embrace the social, political, ethical and moral dimensions
of learning relying on the capacity of the learners to become autonomous, independent
thinkers and agents for social change. In contrast to transactional and transformative
orientations, transmission orientation positions the student in a passive role as the recipient of
knowledge from the educator, who systematically attempts to transfer it (Van Gyn & Grove-
White, 2011; Zepke, Nugent, & Leach, 2011). Cooperative education endeavors to move the
student beyond transmission to becoming more self-determined life-long learners, who are
prepared for a future of work, and life, that by its very nature, is unpredictable and difficult to
plan for.
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 259
Experiential learning philosophies dating back to the work of John Dewey predominately in
the early 1900s, and developed further by educators such as Kolb and Schön, underpin much
of the foundational theory for cooperative education and other work-integrated education
approaches. The Deweyan influence on the model presented in this paper stems from his
education philosophy where he made the following key points:
“The environment… is whatever conditions interact with personal needs, desires,
purposes, and capacities to create the experience which is had” (Dewey, 1938, p. 44)
“The two principles of interaction and continuity are not separated from each other.
They intercept and unite. They are… the longitudinal and lateral aspects of the
experience” (Dewey, 1938, p. 44)
“All human experience is ultimately social: that it involves contact and
communication” (Dewey, 1938, p. 38)
These three quotes from Dewey illuminate the notions of education as an ongoing social
experience having longevity, breadth and depth, and is reliant on the interactions and
communication of the individual within the learning environment. A key challenge for
students with learning through experience, is knowing what to learn and how to learn, as there
is no set curriculum, and what is available to be learnt may be unpredictable or even difficult
for the student to see or identify as a learning moment or event.
It is well recognized by cooperative education proponents that critical reflection plays an
integral role in enhancing the likelihood of an experience leading to learning (Eames & Coll,
2010; Fleming & Martin, 2007; Harvey et al., 2010; Lucas & Fleming, 2012; Martin & Fleming,
2006; Raelin, Glick, McLaughlin, Porter, & Stellar, 2008; Van Gyn, 1996). Accordingly, there
are many ways to employ critical reflection within a cooperative education program, such as
reflective journals, e-portfolio content, reflective writing within reports or essays and reflective
conversations with supervisors or in student groups. The practice of critical reflection within
the context of a cooperative education program has the capacity to enhance several aspects of
the students learning experience. These aspects might include all or many of the following:
bringing together students’ workplace and university learning
contributing to greater depth of understanding and learning
establishing opportunities to explore a deeper understanding of a particular
workplace experience
allowing for freedom to explore and experiment with ideas and knowledge
the active construction of one’s ‘new’ knowledge,
developing attitudes that value personal and intellectual growth,
and having the potential to impact on future practices and learning.
THE PURPOSE OF A MODEL
There exists a degree of confusion around the terms model and framework (Rolfe, Jasper, &
Freshwater, 2011). Taking the lead from Rolfe et al (2011), the term model referred to in this
paper denotes the philosophy and theoretically defensible assumptions that support a specific
approach to reflection. This is akin to the use of the term methodology when explaining ones’
research approach. Whereas a framework, similar to methods in research, is a specific set of
steps or phases used to provide guidance and support for reflection. Complex concepts,
underpinned by specific theory can be presented in a visual format to help make it become
more accessible and comprehensible to the teacher and learner. It can provide a platform for
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 260
on going explanations, discussions and deliberation. Much like a road map or mind map, a
visual model can guide the reader from one place to another with a tangible, actual overall
picture, and if possible many of the finer details. Although a map can be easy to follow it is
best supported by a clearly delivered description or written explanation.
The value of a learning model, as presented in this paper, is to afford all stakeholders (student,
academic, industry) with an opportunity to clearly visualize a theoretical and practical
conceptualization of critical reflection, in order to enhance how they can apply it in practice.
This is especially important when the theoretical concept is perceived to be complex, and
challenging for students to understand how it might be used most effectively. Teachers and
students alike can benefit from being able to use a visual representation particularly if difficult
or complex sets of relationships, as seen with cooperative education, are to be manipulated
and understood. If a person is able to manipulate these complex ideas through visualization
it may lead to greater possibility of understanding and retaining information, and an increased
capacity to examine individual components of a complex arrangement. Utilizing a model for
this type of understanding encourages and promotes a deeper approach to learning through
reflective practices.
To date there is a paucity of research in the field of cooperative education, with a focus on
understanding students’ experiences of practicing critical reflection, particularly in the context
of sport cooperative education. This paper draws upon the findings of a research study
broadly focused on exploring how sport cooperative education students experience the
process of critical reflection (Lucas, 2015). A conceptual model emerged from this research
and was developed to illustrate how critical reflection can be positioned within a cooperative
education program. This model may assist cooperative education facilitators with student
preparation prior to their work placement, in that the model provides a visual means for
increasing students’ understanding of how critical reflection can enhance their cooperative
education learning experience (Tennant, McMullen, & Kaczynski, 2010). The focus of this
paper is to present and explain a model, positioning critical reflection as a learning tool in a
complex learning environment, such as cooperative education.
RESEARCH DESIGN
The highly contextualized nature of this research was well suited to a qualitative case study
methodology. This approach is commonly used in work integrated learning, as well as, in
many other areas of education research. The strategic value of the case study lies in its ability
to highlight what can be learnt from a single case (Schram, 2006), while readers are invited to
draw inferences that may be applicable to their own situation (Lincoln & Guba, 1990). The
boundaries for this intrinsic case study (Stake, 1995) are situated around one cohort of third
year tertiary sport students who had recently completed and passed all assessments
contributing towards their year-long cooperative education program. To enhance
trustworthiness of this case study multiple sources of data were collected. These took the form
of cooperative education documents, a questionnaire, interviews and student reflective journal
entries. Ethics approval was sought and gained from the relevant ethics committees. To
protect all identities all data was numerically coded.
The cooperative education program completion interview data and their respectively aligned
academic year-long reflective journal entry data were reconstructed to form six unique
research narratives. Utilizing John Dewey’s (1938) education theories, in particular his
philosophies related to experience and reflective thinking, each of the six research narratives
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 261
were subjected to thematic analysis. This type of analysis is consistent with most forms of
qualitative research where engagement in some form of thematic coding occurs (Braun &
Clarke, 2006, 2013). From the thematic analysis of the data from within, between and across
each narrative, several interconnected and interactional themes, related to critical reflection as
a learning strategy within cooperative education, emerged. The model presented in this paper
was shaped and formed as the data analysis phase of the research progressed.
THE TRANSACTIONAL MODEL OF CRITICAL REFLECTION
Informed by Dewey’s (1997/1910, 1938) theory of experience and education, analysis of the
research narratives produced four overarching themes with several subthemes. These
overarching themes included; learning environment, learning experiences, learning self and
utility of critical reflection as a learning strategy. It is within the latter theme where the
subtheme, the place of critical reflection in cooperative education, is situated. Together these
themes support the tripartite learning process that lies at the heart of cooperative education
thus providing a foundation from which this model of critical reflection was developed.
To date, no published diagrammatic representations have been found to assist with the
development or enhancement of our understandings of the complex dynamics and interplay
of factors that may contribute towards the positioning and understanding of critical reflection
within the cooperative education context. The transactional model of critical reflection (shown
in Figure 1), although structurally simple, provides a starting platform for further educational
dialogue. This will progress the understanding of critical reflection in complex learning
environments and consequently, show how it might be better taught, learnt, assessed and
researched. It also provides a platform for understanding and demonstrating the versatility of
critical reflection in drawing together the multiple dimensions of the cooperative education
experience that is continual, cumulative and progressive.
This model highlights the place of critical reflection within a cooperative education program
generic structure as it brings together and interrelates each of the three key contributors, that
is, the student, workplace and university, within the learning arrangement. The interrelated
nature of this model aligns with the collaborative nature of cooperative education where the
student, university and workplace interact with each other for mutual benefit (Cooper et al.,
2010). In this model each contributor is dynamic in his, her or its own right; however, within
this educational arrangement transaction through interaction and collaboration occurring
between each contributor. The overlapping areas between each contributor represent dynamic
transactional drivers of critical reflection within a cooperative education program structure.
The student-workplace interaction (E) provides opportunities for experiences to occur forming
the basis of verbal or written critical reflection, such as a presentation, reflective journal or
reflective element within a report or e-portfolio. Interactions between the university and
student (A) includes the implementation of specific pedagogical approaches to actively
encourage critical reflection, as well as the provision of academic supervision for guidance and
support with reflective practices, and other academic requirements. Lastly, the university-
workplace interaction (TP) depicts how theoretical knowledge from the university when
applied to workplace activities, and vice versa, generates and perpetuates opportunities for
critical reflection.
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 262
FIGURE 1: A transactional model of critical reflection (CR) within a cooperative education program
structure where E = experience, TP = theory and practice, A = assessments/pedagogy/academic supervision
(Lucas, 2015)
This multidimensional transactional model is interpreted from two orientations: firstly, by
identifying factors that influence critical reflection (inwardly pointing arrows) and, secondly,
by recognizing the influence critical reflection may have on each learning community
(workplace and university) and the individual learner (outwardly pointing arrows).
Examining this model from the transactional areas (E, A, and TP) towards the centre (CR)
suggests these interactions may influence students’ perceptions, practice and engagement with
critical reflection. The practice of critical reflection brings together each of the key contributors,
enabling students to better understand the workplace, self and university within the context
of cooperative education. The orientation viewed from the centrally positioned critical
reflection towards each contributor (student, workplace and university) highlights the
consequences and actions resultant from engaging in critical reflection. Critical reflection may
bring about changes in student perceptions and understandings to enable planning of future
actions. New ways of thinking and being, stimulated through critical reflection, enabled active
student participation with the workplace community with the potential for the student to
initiate or influence change in workplace practices and culture. The practice of critical
reflection contributes towards development of the university graduate profile and may enhance
the university’s reputation for developing students who are not only work and career ready
but also future ready (Fleming & Haigh, 2017), for the industry and beyond.
The arrangement of this model is supported by quotes that represent widespread themes
evident within the data. The quotes exemplifying the interactive areas depicted as the
intersecting spaces between the three stakeholders in the model. The intersecting spaces are
represented as primary drivers of student critical reflections. The following quotes illustrate
how the student workplace interaction (see E in Figure 1) encouraged student engagement and
Student
WorkplaceUniversity
CR
TP
A
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 263
development of critical reflection, while reciprocally enhancing professional development of
the student.
It’s just professionally…you can’t stop getting better because as soon as you do that
your environment changes and you stay the same…you have to be constantly changing
and moving with the environment, and if you stop, the environment is going to keep
going and you’re going to get left behind. So you always have to keep learning in the
professional world, always have to keep developing and critical reflection, I think, is a
great tool to do that. (Interview 7)
I feel like I can act more professionally in that sort of setting now than I did at the start
of the year. And I felt that came from the reflection. (Interview 3)
The second set of quotes express the student university interaction (see A in Figure 1) where the
students recognized critical reflection as a type of thinking to be developed through engaging
in the cooperative education program. This type of thinking required effort and practice to
enable learning to occur in a place that is not always seen as a traditional classroom. The
student suggests the efforts and/or willingness to engage in reflective thinking can lead to the
recognition and acknowledgment of learning opportunities, and foster the prospect of self-
improvement.
I would lose opportunity to learn how to think. And because it’s such a high order of
thinking, critical reflection, you would miss out on that…you’re learning all this stuff
in the industry and there’s so much learning going on, but if you don’t reflect on them
and capture them and pinpoint them down like I said before – if you don’t grab them
and grapple with them and talk about them, then it’s just past, it’s just like, oh, that
happened and didn’t really think about it, whereas it could have been something that
you learnt about and made you into a better person. (Interview 7)
I had to make myself think and come up with the resolutions myself, which actually
makes it a lot easier in the future because you’ve widened your scope to do things. This
is what happened probably halfway through and I realised that it’s really working and
so I continuously improved my performance from that. (Interview 2)
The next quotes are taken from student reflective journals and demonstrate the university
workplace interaction (see TP in Figure 1). The integration of theory (university) and practice
(workplace) is illustrated through these passages. Challenging and novel workplace situations
propelled the students to critically reflect by drawing upon university theory in order to
understand the workplace dynamics being experienced or as a way to meaningfully contribute
to workplace activities.
…this is a male-dominated organisation and me crying gave them power and showed
my feminine side (possibly) on reflection from leadership lectures… Leadership has
had a great impact on my life and I am trying to put some of the theories into practice
to achieve my learning outcomes… It has really helped me to understand that it is okay
to be feminine and it is okay to care about the organisation, and to communicate clearly
about how you feel and what can be done to improve it in the future... (Journal 5)
I was able to assist a Year 6 teacher with Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU)
games…This was a really positive experience and the kids seemed to enjoy the
games…It was great to see a teacher trying the new TGfU concept in her class and we
have discussed the possibility of more of these types of sessions. (Journal 6)
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 264
This model is representative of how critical reflection can facilitate and enhance cooperative
education or experiential learning where there is both ‘continuity and interaction between the
learner’ and what is able to be learnt (Dewey, 1938 p. 10). The challenge with the current
diagram is how to illustrate the intersecting circles as being in perpetual motion or repeating
cycles of new interaction/s in both directions, towards and away from critical reflection.
Additionally, there may be times when it could be considered there is more activity in one
dimension than another. So in effect, the circles could be of varying sizes to denote the degree
or strength of each interaction. Clearly the model illustrates all three contributors as operating
together in a collaborative manner, and it is through critical reflection that integration occurs.
Through this integration, there is the potential for a sound educational experience for the
learner. The purpose of the model is to aid and enhance student understanding of how each
part of their experience, within the board picture of cooperative education, can be drawn upon
for critical reflection, and the prospective consequences of this interaction.
DISCUSSION
The transactional model of critical reflection supports, and is supported by, experiential
learning theories underpinning cooperative education and the various ways in which they are
enacted. Through this student-centred or driven learning approach, knowledge is derived
from experience, which in this context is extremely dynamic due to the complex interactions
as they occur. The term ‘interaction’ used to describe this model was derived from Dewey’s
(1938, p. 42) philosophy of education where he examines two key criteria of experience these
include; continuity and interaction. As Dewey (1938) explains, “continuity and interaction in
their active union with each other provide the measure of the educative significance and value
of an experience” (p. 44-45). Continuity requires collaboration between each contributor,
identified as a key feature of cooperative education, thus giving a longitudinal aspect to the
overall experience, including consideration of future activities. Positioning of critical reflection
in the centre of the model allows for integration of the three contributors in a way that is
orientated towards future knowledge (based on prior knowledge) and potential action.
According to Dewey (1938) the “quality” of an experience is identified through two features.
His first feature, which is easily identified, lies in how “agreeable” it might be to the learners,
or the perceived value of the experience, therefore influencing his/her level of engagement in
the activity (p. 27). The second, less obvious feature is determined by the degree of influence
an earlier experience might have upon later experiences. Critical reflection, as presented
within this model, has the capacity to cumulatively link experiences and interactions to one
another in order to reduce the likelihood of experiences being or becoming disconnected, even
though each experience might individually be agreeable or exciting in its own right.
Connecting experiences through the development of critical reflection enhances ones’ ability
to understand and manage future events. Elkjaer (2009) states; “experience has to become
reflective and communicated (with self and others) in order to later be used in an anticipatory
way” (p. 82).
This model does not demonstrate the internal conditions of the learner, but illustrates the
objective conditions of the learning situation. Frameworks, such as Borton or Gibbs (Rolfe et
al., 2011) should be utilized to assist the development of reflective writing and thinking, as
they generally include some acknowledgement of the internal conditions of the individual
(such as emotions) that may influence and promote particular learning moments. Critical
reflection is often driven by uncertainties or difficulties occurring, within one of each of the
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 265
interactive domains (E, A, and TP) that promote certain feelings. Recognizing opportunities
to critically reflect may stem from the uncertainty held within the experience, which may be
interpreted as feeling uncomfortable. Critical reflection on this type of experience may assist
the student transform a difficult situation into one of a more manageable status and towards
feeling more comfortable. Through understanding this challenging situation future actions
and behaviors might be changed or altered.
According to Van Gyn and Grove-White (2011) transactional learning focuses on the
“development of skills needed to acquire knowledge” with a strong “emphasis on intellectual
and rational activities associated with problem solving and the development of cognitive skills
to further support knowledge acquisition” (p. 33). The transactional model presented
emphasizes the role critical reflection (as a cognitive learning process) plays as the students,
who are independent learners, explore how the transactions within a cooperative education
experience occur and what they have learnt from the transactions embedded in their
experiences. By considering the outcomes of critically reflecting through the model, it is
possible for transformative learning to occur, that is, the “growth in critical consciousness,
autonomy, and independent thinking” (Van Gyn & Grove-White, 2011, p. 36). As indicated
by the model, the practice of critical reflection can be transformative, as the learner may
become a “critical agent of change” (Zegwaard, 2015, p.92) rather than a “participant of the
norm” (Zegwaard, 2015, p.94) within each of the three cooperative education transactional
dimensions. This model supports Zegwaard’s (2015) claim that “there needs to be greater
recognition that during work placement transformative learning can, and does, occur” (p. 92).
This model considers and demonstrates how critical reflection can play a pivotal role in the
integration of each contributor (educator, student, workplace supervisor) through their
participation in the learning approach. Integration of this nature addresses the need and desire
for higher education that is progressive and dynamic, as it prepares an individual for a
professional future, often requiring an understanding of their personal and professional
identity and having the ability to learn independently for life. Hence, the role of each
contributor in this model is important. As Dewey (1938) points out it is the “responsibility of
educators…they should know how to utilize surrounding, physical and social, that exist so as
to extract from them all they have to contribute to building up experiences that are
worthwhile” (p. 40). The support offered by the educator to enable student engagement in
critical reflection is important in order for them to gain deeper meaning from their experiences.
A cooperative education program encourages students to actively participate in the formation
of the purpose/s of their own learning (through learning contracts or similar), a complex
intellectual operation (Dewey, 1938). Students attitudes and aptitude can significantly impact
on the type of learning agreed upon and achieved. The workplace environment provides
students with opportunities to contribute something meaningful to how it operates. Although
the workplace is often the source of an event suitable to critically reflect upon it is seldom
considered to be the place where critical reflection is learnt. It is unclear what role the industry
supervisor might play in assisting students with advancing their practice of critical reflection.
A students’ desire and ability to critically reflect can hinge on the level of involvement and
connection between all contributors and the role each plays in the relationship. Dewey (1938)
confirms this sentiment when he states; “control of individual action is effected by the whole
situation in which individuals are involved, in which they share and of which they are
cooperative or interacting parts” (p. 53).
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 266
Overall there are several possible outcomes arising from the development of this model. These
include;
• The presence of a schematic representation of critical reflection as part of a
cooperative education program.
• Students, and teachers, are invited to use this model to demonstrate how critical
reflection fits within this specific learning environment.
• The model contributes to the discussion of the role critical reflection could play in the
notions of integration within cooperative education.
• This model clearly illustrates the complexity of work-integrated education and can
be applied to a range of work place based learning programs.
• An understanding of where critical reflection is positioned in a program of learning
of this nature challenges those who might suggest cooperative education is purely
“work experience”.
• A contribution to the dialogue for advancing theoretical developments related to
critical reflection in cooperative education.
• This model provides researchers with a platform for ongoing examination of student
experiences of critical reflection in cooperative education.
CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH
The transactional model of critical reflection presented in this paper identifies the collaborative
and interactional aspects of utilizing critical reflection within a cooperative education
program. Centralizing critical reflection within this model advocates for the value of critical
reflection in work-integrated education, particularly to enhance the development of
professionalism and life long learning. The utility of critical reflection has the potential to
encourage students to engage with learning by examining their workplace experiences within
the three dimensions of a cooperative education partnership or alignment. If learning is to
occur through the experiences emanating from the transactions identified within this model,
then cognition is important. Cognition brings the bodily manifestation of an experience into
the conscious realm of being able to communicate and understand it. If it was possible to peel
back further layers of the model, we would find beneath the centrally positioned critical
reflection the frameworks to guide and support the cognition we associate with being able to
critically reflect.
Based on the understandings derived from this model there are three key areas identified for
further examination. Firstly, the paper acknowledges collaboration is a foundation principle
of cooperative education, however there are many challenges to attaining alignment of all three
stakeholders. It would be of interest to explore further how critical reflection may support this
alignment. Secondly, the model presented has centralized critical reflection in a cooperative
education program thus supporting the importance of advocating for students to practice
critical reflection. Examining how students perceive this model as a way of supporting the
development and advancement of critical reflection practices would be useful. Finally, does
student engagement in the practice of critical reflection have the potential to enable, encourage,
or guide students towards a truly integrated learning approach?
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 267
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank those who provided support with improving this manuscript.
This includes critical friends; Professor Chris Hickey, Associate Professor Bernadette Walker-
Gibbs, Dr Amanda Mooney and editorial assistance from Dr Alexandra Bowmar.
REFERENCES
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness (1st ed.). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Billett, S. (2009). Realising the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education.
Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827-843.
Billett, S., & Choy, S. (2011). Cooperative and work-integrated education as a pedagogy for lifelong
learning. In R. K. Coll & K. E. Zegwaard (Eds.), International handbook for cooperative and work-
integrated education: International perspectives of theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 25–30).
Lowell, MA: World Association for Cooperative Education.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,
3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. London, England:
Sage.
Cooper, L., Orrell, J., & Bowden, M. (2010). Work integrated learning a guide to effective practice (1st ed.). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Cowan, J. (2014). Noteworthy matters for attention in reflective journal writing. Active Learning in Higher
Education, 15(1), 53–64. doi:10.1177/1469787413514647
Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. New York, NY: Dover Publications. (Original work published 1910)
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Touchstone.
Eames, C., & Coll, R. K. (2010). Cooperative education: Integrating classroom and workplace learning. In
S. Billett (Ed.), Learning through practice, professional and practice based learning (pp. 180–196).
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3939-2_10
Elkjaer, B. (2009). Pragmatism: A learning theory for the future. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of
learning: Learning theorists... in their own words (pp. 74–89). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fleming, J. (2015). Exploring stakeholders’ perspectives of the influences on student learning in
cooperative education. Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 16(2), 109–119.
Fleming, J., & Haigh, N. (2017). Examining and challenging the intentions of work-integrated learning.
Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 7(2).
Fleming, J., & Martin, A. (2007). Facilitating reflective learning journeys in sport cooperative education.
Journal of Hospitality, Sport, Tourism, Leisure and Education, 6(2), 115–121. doi:10.3794/johlste.62.171
Harvey, M., Coulson, D., Mackaway, J., & Winchester-Seeto, T. (2010). Aligning reflection in the
cooperative education curriculum. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 11(3), 137–152.
Harvey, M., Coulson, D., & McMaugh, A. (2016). Towards a theory of the Ecology of Reflection: Reflective
practice for experiential learning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning
Practice, 13(2), 2.
Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1994, July). Facilitating reflection: Issues and research. Paper presented at the meeting
of the Conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association, Queensland, Australia.
Kolb, D. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall. (Original work published 1984)
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1990). Judging the quality of case study reports. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education, 3(1), 53–59. doi:10.1080/0951839900030105
Lucas, P., & Fleming, J. (2012). Reflection in sport and recreation cooperative education: Journals or blogs?
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 13(1), 55–64.
Lucas, P. (2015). Exploring critical reflection in cooperative education: A case study (Doctoral thesis, Deakin
University, Melbourne, Australia). Retrieved from http://dro.deakin.edu.au/view/DU:30084875
LUCAS: A transactional model to position critical reflection within cooperative education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2017, 18(3), 257-268 268
Martin, A. J., & Fleming, J. (2006). Facilitated reflection in cooperative education in sport. Proceedings of the
9th New Zealand Association for Cooperative Education Conference. Retrieved from
https://nzace.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/2006-queenstown.pdf
Miller, J. P., & Seller, W. (1990). Curriculum Perspectives and Practice. Mississauga, ON: Copp Clark Pitman.
Raelin, J., Glick, L., McLaughlin, K., Porter, R., & Stellar, J. (2008). Reflection-in-action on co-op: The next
learning breakthrough. Journal of Cooperative Education, 42(2), 16–33.
Rolfe, G., Jasper, M., & Freshwater, D. (2011). Critical reflection in practice (2nd ed.). Basingstoke, England:
Palgrave.
Schön, D. A. (2009). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London, England: Ashgate.
(Original work published 1983)
Schram, T. H. (2006). Conceptualizing and proposing qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Smith, E. (2011). Teaching critical reflection. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(2), 211–223.
doi:10.1080/13562517.2010.515022
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tennant, M., McMullen, C., & Kaczynski, D. (2010). Teaching, learning and research in higher education: A
critical approach. New York, NY: Routledge.
Van Gyn, G. (1996). Reflective practice: The needs of professions and the promise of cooperative education.
Journal of Cooperative Education, 31(2–3), 103–131.
Van Gyn, G., & Grove-White, E. (2011). Theories of learning in education. In R. K. Coll & K. E. Zegwaard
(Eds.), International handbook for cooperative and work-integrated education: International perspectives of
theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 31–40). Lowell, MA: World Association for Cooperative
Education.
Zegwaard, K. (2015). Building an excellent foundation for research: Challenges and current research needs.
Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 16(2), 89-99.
Zepke, N., Nugent, D., & Leach, L. (2011). Reflection to transformation: A self-help book for teachers (2nd ed.).
Wellington, New Zealand: Dunmore.
About the Journal
The Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education publishes peer-reviewed original research, topical issues, and best practice
articles from throughout the world dealing with Cooperative Education (Co-op) and Work-Integrated Learning/Education
(WIL).
In this Journal, Co-op/WIL is defined as an educational approach that uses relevant work-based projects that form an integrated
and assessed part of an academic program of study (e.g., work placements, internships, practicum). These programs should
have clear linkages with, or add to, the knowledge and skill base of the academic program. These programs can be described
by a variety of names, such as cooperative and work-integrated education, work-based learning, workplace learning,
professional training, industry-based learning, engaged industry learning, career and technical education, internships,
experiential education, experiential learning, vocational education and training, fieldwork education, and service learning.
The Journal’s main aim is to allow specialists working in these areas to disseminate their findings and share their knowledge
for the benefit of institutions, co-op/WIL practitioners, and researchers. The Journal desires to encourage quality research and
explorative critical discussion that will lead to the advancement of effective practices, development of further understanding of
co-op/WIL, and promote further research.
Submitting Manuscripts
Before submitting a manuscript, please unsure that the ‘instructions for authors’ has been followed
(www.apjce.org/instructions-for-authors). All manuscripts are to be submitted for blind review directly to the Editor-in-Chief
([email protected]) by way of email attachment. All submissions of manuscripts must be in Microsoft Word format, with
manuscript word counts between 3,000 and 5,000 words (excluding abstract, references, and tables).
All manuscripts, if deemed relevant to the Journal’s audience, will be double-blind reviewed by two or more reviewers.
Manuscripts submitted to the Journal with authors names included with have the authors’ names removed by the Editor-in-
Chief before being reviewed to ensure anonymity.
Typically, authors receive the reviewers’ comments about 1.5 months after the submission of the manuscript. The Journal uses
a constructive process for review and preparation of the manuscript, and encourages its reviewers to give supportive and
extensive feedback on the requirements for improving the manuscript as well as guidance on how to make the amendments.
If the manuscript is deemed acceptable for publication, and reviewers’ comments have been satisfactorily addressed, the
manuscript is prepared for publication by the Copy Editor. The Copy Editor may correspond with the authors to check details,
if required. Final publication is by discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. Final published form of the manuscript is via the Journal
website (www.apjce.org), authors will be notified and sent a PDF copy of the final manuscript. There is no charge for publishing
in APJCE and the Journal allows free open access for its readers.
Types of Manuscripts Sought by the Journal
Types of manuscripts the Journal accepts are primarily of two forms; research reports describing research into aspects of
Cooperative Education and Work-Integrated Learning/Education, and topical discussion articles that review relevant literature
and give critical explorative discussion around a topical issue.
The Journal does also accept best practice papers but only if it presents a unique or innovative practice of a Co-op/WIL program
that is likely to be of interest to the broader Co-op/WIL community. The Journal also accepts a limited number of Book Reviews
of relevant and recently published books.
Research reports should contain; an introduction that describes relevant literature and sets the context of the inquiry, a description
and justification for the methodology employed, a description of the research findings-tabulated as appropriate, a discussion
of the importance of the findings including their significance for practitioners, and a conclusion preferably incorporating
suggestions for further research.
Topical discussion articles should contain a clear statement of the topic or issue under discussion, reference to relevant literature,
critical discussion of the importance of the issues, and implications for other researchers and practitioners.
EDITORIAL BOARD
Editor-in-Chief
Dr. Karsten Zegwaard University of Waikato, New Zealand
Copy Editor
Yvonne Milbank Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education
Editorial Board Members
Mr. Matthew Campbell Queensland Institute of Business and Technology, Australia
Dr. Sarojni Choy Griffith University, Australia
Prof. Richard K. Coll University of South Pacific, Fiji
Prof. Rick Cummings Murdoch University, Australia
Prof. Leigh Deves Charles Darwin University, Australia
Dr. Maureen Drysdale University of Waterloo, Canada
Dr. Chris Eames University of Waikato, New Zealand
Mrs. Sonia Ferns Curtin University, Australia
Dr. Jenny Fleming Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Dr. Phil Gardner Michigan State University
Dr. Thomas Groenewald University of South Africa, South Africa
Dr. Kathryn Hays Massey University, New Zealand
Prof. Joy Higgs Charles Sturt University, Australia
Ms. Katharine Hoskyn Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Dr. Sharleen Howison Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand
Dr. Denise Jackson Edith Cowan University, Australia
Dr. Nancy Johnston Simon Fraser University, Canada
Dr. Mark Lay University of Waikato, New Zealand
Assoc. Prof. Andy Martin Massey University, New Zealand
Ms. Susan McCurdy University of Waikato, New Zealand
Dr. Norah McRae University of Victoria, Canada
Dr. Keri Moore Southern Cross University, Australia
Prof. Beverly Oliver Deakin University, Australia
Assoc. Prof. Janice Orrell Flinders University, Australia
Dr. Deborah Peach Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Mrs. Judene Pretti Waterloo University, Canada
Assoc. Prof. Philip Rose Hannam University, South Korea
Dr. Anna Rowe Macquarie University, Australia
Dr. David Skelton Eastern Institute of Technology, New Zealand
Prof. Heather Smigiel Flinders University, Australia
Dr. Calvin Smith Brisbane Workplace Mediations, Australia
Prof. Neil Taylor University of New England, Australia
Assoc. Prof. Franziska Trede Charles Sturt University, Australia
Ms. Genevieve Watson Elysium Associates Pty, Australia
Prof. Neil I. Ward University of Surrey, United Kingdom
Dr. Nick Wempe Taratahi Agricultural Training Centre, New Zealand
Dr. Marius L. Wessels Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa
Dr. Theresa Winchester-Seeto Charles Sturt University, Australia
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education
www.apjce.org
Publisher: New Zealand Association for Cooperative Education